9 ms·

Well, yes. If not "everyone," certainly lots and lots of folks are just staying home whenever possible. Because we are in the middle of a global pandemic. I th

Well, yes. If not "everyone," certainly lots and lots of folks are just staying home whenever possible. Because we are in the middle of a global pandemic. I think this has much more to do with "we are in a global pandemic" than "you can't meet people doing remote work." Certainly, there were a number of larger groups that I used to hang out with consistently pre-pandemic, but now have totally abandoned. I'm not interested in maintaining an online relationship with those groups; their value to me was in the face-to-face moments. But that's just not a thing right now. I'm certainly not going to go out of my way to expose my family to people who may or may not even believe in vaccinating themselves.

sim_card_map 5y ago
Life has always been normal here in Sweden. No lockdowns, mask mandates, restaurants have always been open. And no excess deaths. So don't speak for everyone.
- IggleSniggle 5y ago
  I made a point to only speak for myself, my own situation, and subjective but certainly true "lots and lots of people," whereas the person I was replying to spoke in generalities.
- smt88 5y ago
  > And no excess deaths. False[1][2][3][4][5]. Sweden had 7.7% higher mortality in 2020 than it averaged from 2016-2019. By comparison, Sweden's closest neighbors (geographically, demographically, and socioeconomically) had far, far lower mortality because of lockdowns, mask mandates, and closing restaurants[3][4]. > "Sweden, with a COVID-19 attributed death rate of 0.54 per 1000 population as of July 5, has a higher death rate compared with its neighbours: 11.5× compared with Norway (0.05 deaths per 1000 population), 5.1× compared with Denmark (0.10 deaths per 1000 population), and 9.1× compared with Finland (0.06 deaths per 1000 population)."[1] Even more damning: we now know that Sweden intentionally allowed the virus to spread and never believed their own words about people behaving responsibly without mandates[5]. They knew that their lack of action would kill people. You can argue all you want that some of those deaths are a fair price to pay to eat at restaurants, but you can't argue that they didn't happen or that no one could have prevented them. 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1403494820980264 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14034948209802... 2. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe-mortality/sweden-saw-lower-2020-death-spike-than-much-of-europe-data-idUSKBN2BG1R9 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe... 3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9 4. https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-been-so-so-surreal-critics-sweden-s-lax-pandemic-policies-face-fierce-backlash https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-been-so-so-surr... 5. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/12/22/sweden-coronavirus-covid-response/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/12/22/sweden-coronavirus-covi...
  - kaczordon 5y ago
    Meanwhile Belgium had around 20% excess deaths and much much stricter lockdowns. Most of Sweden’s excess deaths occurred in nursing homes, which weren’t protected enough; it had nothing to do with regular people eating at restaurants and everything to do with the protocol at those specific places. It’s quite obvious that lockdowns have dubious effects(if any) while the harms and detriment to society never seem to be measured or are dismissed flippantly as people just wanting to eat out.
    - smt88 5y ago
      If your theory about the deaths being in nursing homes were true, we wouldn't have seen excess deaths in 2020 in age groups under 75. That was not the case[1]. Even 50-year-olds in Sweden had a spike of deaths in 2020. Norwegians were locked down and seem to be fine. They're not dead, at least. 1. https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/31/1/17/5968985 https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/31/1/17/5968985
      - kaczordon 5y ago
        It's not a theory, 50% of all COVID deaths were in nursing homes: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-commission/sweden-failed-to-protect-elderly-in-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-idUSKBN28P1PP https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-co... Also the paper you linked agrees with me, The highest age groups, i.e. ages 80 and above, were most strongly affected by the pandemic.
        magicalist 5y ago
        I think the "theory" being referred to is > it had nothing to do with regular people eating at restaurants and everything to do with the protocol at those specific places Also if we're going to be pedantic, we should be consistently pedantic: > 50% of all COVID deaths were in nursing homes that article actually says under 50% and it's from December 2020.
- sampo 5y ago
  > And no excess deaths. Euromomo shows excess mortality for Sweden for both the spring 2020, and the winter 2020-2021: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country
  - savant_penguin 5y ago
    I just looked at graphs and it looks so incredibly mild compared to the rest of Europe (especially spain*)
- pshc 5y ago
  Sweden had quite a few excess deaths compared to Finland and Norway. What do you mean by this?
- the-smug-one 5y ago
  Uuhm, you're also wrong on life just being "normal". Sweden did have quite a few restrictions, just not as many or as heavy as their neighbors.
mmmpop 5y ago
[flagged]
- stefs 5y ago
  vaccinated people may carry the virus, but they're a lot less infectious than un-vaccinated.
  - idiotsecant 5y ago
    While getting vaccinated is a massively good idea both for the individual and society it does appear to be the case that people who are vaccinated or were diseased and recovered and have antibodies that way that are exposed to delta virus can nonetheless develop high viral loads, high enough to be contagious to people who are not immune. It does appear that in vaccinated or otherwise immune people the viral load drops very quickly. So it's not quite as simple as people with an axe to grind will claim it is, but it is possible for a vaccinated person to briefly have the same viral load as an unvaccinated person. The duration of that dangerous period is much shorter when vaccinated, and of course the risk to the vaccinated person is much, much lower.
  - SergeAx 5y ago
    Is there a scientific research on that matter? How much is "lot less"?
    - danenania 5y ago
      The consensus on this stuff changes quickly so I may be wrong, but my understanding is that vaccinated people can reach peak viral loads that are similar to unvaccinated people, but tend to be infectious for a significantly shorter period of time, making them less contagious overall. I'm not sure exactly how much shorter but I want to say current research points toward ~50%.
- IggleSniggle 5y ago
  First off, if you're not vaccinated, it's really a lot less safe for you for me to be around you. I don't really want to be responsible for getting you or your family sick. But beyond that, if I can't trust you to take very basic precaution of vaccinating, can I trust you to take the much more obnoxious precaution of masking up, or the still more inconvenient precaution of social distancing generally? Or quarantining after travel? True, I was using a shorthand heuristic that is almost certainly flawed in the specific. Some people cannot get vaccines. I haven't done any research on it, so I may be wrong, but I also assume that if you have antibodies to fight off an infectious disease, the disease is statistically more likely to exist in lesser concentrations than in a person who does not have those antibodies, if it exists at all.
bserge 5y ago
"wE aRe iN tHe MidDlE oF a GlObAl PaNdEmIc" Man, fuck off. Sick to the bone of this shit. Where's that massive solar flare to show us real fucking problems. Not a manmade retarded response to a pathetic virus. Edit: and you, piece of shit going through old comments and downvoting everything. I see you. You're pathetic. At least flag something.
- _6pvr 5y ago
  We are in the middle of a global pandemic. I'm sorry this reality upsets you.
  - bserge 5y ago
    No, the middle is far behind.
    - icedchai 5y ago
      We're probably closer to the beginning than the end. Look at the numbers and you'll see things are worse than they were a year ago, in terms of cases and deaths. Imagine if we didn't have the vaccines.
dan-robertson 5y ago
I think it is, on average, incorrect to say that people are staying home for fear of the pandemic which is what I think you are suggesting. I think the average hn reader probably skews much more cautious about coronavirus, much better able to remain indoors, and much more, for want of a better phrase, socially responsible than the average person. And even among hn readers plenty will not be staying at home much. That said, I think there are pandemic-adjacent reasons people might be doing less socialising. Maybe people you might socialise with have moved away and not been replaced in the last two years. Maybe the people who would organise events you would go to skew more towards the cautious end. Maybe people are less interested in social things due to other upheavals in their lives. Maybe people have forgotten how to socialise. Maybe they are focusing on the relationships they had before more than anything new. Maybe we just forget how hard things were before and look at the past with rose-tinted spectacles.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  Bars and restaurants being closed or having significant restrictions, recreational sports leagues being cancelled, other (often outdoor) events and meetups being cancelled are reasons why lots of people would do less socializing because [other] people are fearful of the pandemic even if they aren't themselves substantially fearful.
- GFischer 5y ago
  In my case, most of my outside socializing was through gaming meetings, and: - the local Gaming Society closed for 2 years (meeting for the first time after 2 years in November), - the local game stores stopped doing in-person events for 2 years (still no news on Magic: the Gathering in-person pre-releases, not authorized for Latin America despite my country being basically covid-free), - I started playing D&D (with coworkers, so the OP has a point), had one in-person session and then we moved to Roll20 (slowly coming back to in-person). I do think people were socializing outside more before the pandemic.
baud147258 5y ago
> Because we are in the middle of a global pandemic. Really? Maybe I forgot because here in France it feels like we've kinda gone back to business as usual, as long as one can show proof of vaccination (necessary if you want to go to the restaurants, cinemas and museums).
- sharken 5y ago
  France, Germany and Italy have really disappointed with their heavyhanded approach against those that are not vaccinated. With that said, i think many are still a bit cautious after being bombarded with warnings of the Coronavirus for 12 months straight. To me though I'm back to normality and slowly but surely everyone else.
  - felipellrocha 5y ago
    > France, Germany and Italy have really disappointed with their heavyhanded approach against those that are not vaccinated. Disappointed who? The anti-vaxxer community? Good.
    - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y ago
      Point of clarification, because you're spreading misinformation: being opposed to one specific vaccine type is NOT the same as being an "anti-vaxxer." It will behoove you to be clear on that point.
      - krageon 5y ago
        > misinformation The overlap between the two groups is so large and the justifications so similar that they may as well be the same. It is not useful for clarity, brevity or comprehension to distinguish the two.
        jcims 5y ago
        This type of generalization is what allows people to bulldoze details and nuance in favor of bright tribal lines. It’s the same psychological shortcut that folks use when they call any social program ‘socialism’. It’s lazy and destructive.
presentation 5y ago
I know plenty of people who are staying home not because they're worried about COVID, but more because they've come to enjoy the seclusion and convenience of ordering delivery all the time.
- OJFord 5y ago
  As someone who 'enjoyed the convenience of delivery' long before the coronavirus pandemic, it's quite weird to realise that wasn't as normal (then) as it seemed. City bubble I suppose. Or not-having-a-car (hardly unusual for London) bubble. (I don't mean takeaway food - though it's certainly 'normal' among certain demographics.. - just groceries, Amazon, etc.)
  - Svperstar 5y ago
    > Or not-having-a-car (hardly unusual for London) bubble. In large sections of the US, I am guessing like 90% of the country it is almost impossible to survive without a car, like you literally will end up homeless without an automobile and I am not exaggerating.
    - OJFord 5y ago
      Sure, but no section of the US large or otherwise is in London.
  - presentation 5y ago
    I live in Tokyo and prefer to go out and eat, despite delivery being easy. Food tastes better when it’s fresh, not served in a plastic container, in a nice environment, and it’s not even hard to do - hundreds of options within a 10 minute walk of my apartment.
    - OJFord 5y ago
      Like I said I'm not talking about takeaway food - which I pretty much never order, agree I'd rather eat in a restaurant. I mean about getting groceries (with which I can prepare the meal) delivered. But I suppose same would stand to compare picking up a takeaway in person vs. having it delivered. (i.e. if that's what I ate, I would almost certainly have it delivered.)

sim_card_map 5y ago

Life has always been normal here in Sweden. No lockdowns, mask mandates, restaurants have always been open. And no excess deaths. So don't speak for everyone.

IggleSniggle 5y ago
I made a point to only speak for myself, my own situation, and subjective but certainly true "lots and lots of people," whereas the person I was replying to spoke in generalities.
smt88 5y ago
> And no excess deaths. False[1][2][3][4][5]. Sweden had 7.7% higher mortality in 2020 than it averaged from 2016-2019. By comparison, Sweden's closest neighbors (geographically, demographically, and socioeconomically) had far, far lower mortality because of lockdowns, mask mandates, and closing restaurants[3][4]. > "Sweden, with a COVID-19 attributed death rate of 0.54 per 1000 population as of July 5, has a higher death rate compared with its neighbours: 11.5× compared with Norway (0.05 deaths per 1000 population), 5.1× compared with Denmark (0.10 deaths per 1000 population), and 9.1× compared with Finland (0.06 deaths per 1000 population)."[1] Even more damning: we now know that Sweden intentionally allowed the virus to spread and never believed their own words about people behaving responsibly without mandates[5]. They knew that their lack of action would kill people. You can argue all you want that some of those deaths are a fair price to pay to eat at restaurants, but you can't argue that they didn't happen or that no one could have prevented them. 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1403494820980264 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14034948209802... 2. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe-mortality/sweden-saw-lower-2020-death-spike-than-much-of-europe-data-idUSKBN2BG1R9 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-europe... 3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9 4. https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-been-so-so-surreal-critics-sweden-s-lax-pandemic-policies-face-fierce-backlash https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-been-so-so-surr... 5. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/12/22/sweden-coronavirus-covid-response/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/12/22/sweden-coronavirus-covi...
- kaczordon 5y ago
  Meanwhile Belgium had around 20% excess deaths and much much stricter lockdowns. Most of Sweden’s excess deaths occurred in nursing homes, which weren’t protected enough; it had nothing to do with regular people eating at restaurants and everything to do with the protocol at those specific places. It’s quite obvious that lockdowns have dubious effects(if any) while the harms and detriment to society never seem to be measured or are dismissed flippantly as people just wanting to eat out.
  - smt88 5y ago
    If your theory about the deaths being in nursing homes were true, we wouldn't have seen excess deaths in 2020 in age groups under 75. That was not the case[1]. Even 50-year-olds in Sweden had a spike of deaths in 2020. Norwegians were locked down and seem to be fine. They're not dead, at least. 1. https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/31/1/17/5968985 https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/article/31/1/17/5968985
    - kaczordon 5y ago
      It's not a theory, 50% of all COVID deaths were in nursing homes: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-commission/sweden-failed-to-protect-elderly-in-covid-pandemic-commission-finds-idUSKBN28P1PP https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-co... Also the paper you linked agrees with me, The highest age groups, i.e. ages 80 and above, were most strongly affected by the pandemic.
      - magicalist 5y ago
        I think the "theory" being referred to is > it had nothing to do with regular people eating at restaurants and everything to do with the protocol at those specific places Also if we're going to be pedantic, we should be consistently pedantic: > 50% of all COVID deaths were in nursing homes that article actually says under 50% and it's from December 2020.
sampo 5y ago
> And no excess deaths. Euromomo shows excess mortality for Sweden for both the spring 2020, and the winter 2020-2021: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#z-scores-by-country
- savant_penguin 5y ago
  I just looked at graphs and it looks so incredibly mild compared to the rest of Europe (especially spain*)
pshc 5y ago
Sweden had quite a few excess deaths compared to Finland and Norway. What do you mean by this?
the-smug-one 5y ago
Uuhm, you're also wrong on life just being "normal". Sweden did have quite a few restrictions, just not as many or as heavy as their neighbors.

mmmpop 5y ago

[flagged]

stefs 5y ago
vaccinated people may carry the virus, but they're a lot less infectious than un-vaccinated.
- idiotsecant 5y ago
  While getting vaccinated is a massively good idea both for the individual and society it does appear to be the case that people who are vaccinated or were diseased and recovered and have antibodies that way that are exposed to delta virus can nonetheless develop high viral loads, high enough to be contagious to people who are not immune. It does appear that in vaccinated or otherwise immune people the viral load drops very quickly. So it's not quite as simple as people with an axe to grind will claim it is, but it is possible for a vaccinated person to briefly have the same viral load as an unvaccinated person. The duration of that dangerous period is much shorter when vaccinated, and of course the risk to the vaccinated person is much, much lower.
- SergeAx 5y ago
  Is there a scientific research on that matter? How much is "lot less"?
  - danenania 5y ago
    The consensus on this stuff changes quickly so I may be wrong, but my understanding is that vaccinated people can reach peak viral loads that are similar to unvaccinated people, but tend to be infectious for a significantly shorter period of time, making them less contagious overall. I'm not sure exactly how much shorter but I want to say current research points toward ~50%.
IggleSniggle 5y ago
First off, if you're not vaccinated, it's really a lot less safe for you for me to be around you. I don't really want to be responsible for getting you or your family sick. But beyond that, if I can't trust you to take very basic precaution of vaccinating, can I trust you to take the much more obnoxious precaution of masking up, or the still more inconvenient precaution of social distancing generally? Or quarantining after travel? True, I was using a shorthand heuristic that is almost certainly flawed in the specific. Some people cannot get vaccines. I haven't done any research on it, so I may be wrong, but I also assume that if you have antibodies to fight off an infectious disease, the disease is statistically more likely to exist in lesser concentrations than in a person who does not have those antibodies, if it exists at all.

bserge 5y ago

"wE aRe iN tHe MidDlE oF a GlObAl PaNdEmIc" Man, fuck off. Sick to the bone of this shit. Where's that massive solar flare to show us real fucking problems. Not a manmade retarded response to a pathetic virus. Edit: and you, piece of shit going through old comments and downvoting everything. I see you. You're pathetic. At least flag something.

_6pvr 5y ago
We are in the middle of a global pandemic. I'm sorry this reality upsets you.
- bserge 5y ago
  No, the middle is far behind.
  - icedchai 5y ago
    We're probably closer to the beginning than the end. Look at the numbers and you'll see things are worse than they were a year ago, in terms of cases and deaths. Imagine if we didn't have the vaccines.

dan-robertson 5y ago

I think it is, on average, incorrect to say that people are staying home for fear of the pandemic which is what I think you are suggesting. I think the average hn reader probably skews much more cautious about coronavirus, much better able to remain indoors, and much more, for want of a better phrase, socially responsible than the average person. And even among hn readers plenty will not be staying at home much. That said, I think there are pandemic-adjacent reasons people might be doing less socialising. Maybe people you might socialise with have moved away and not been replaced in the last two years. Maybe the people who would organise events you would go to skew more towards the cautious end. Maybe people are less interested in social things due to other upheavals in their lives. Maybe people have forgotten how to socialise. Maybe they are focusing on the relationships they had before more than anything new. Maybe we just forget how hard things were before and look at the past with rose-tinted spectacles.

sokoloff 5y ago
Bars and restaurants being closed or having significant restrictions, recreational sports leagues being cancelled, other (often outdoor) events and meetups being cancelled are reasons why lots of people would do less socializing because [other] people are fearful of the pandemic even if they aren't themselves substantially fearful.
GFischer 5y ago
In my case, most of my outside socializing was through gaming meetings, and: - the local Gaming Society closed for 2 years (meeting for the first time after 2 years in November), - the local game stores stopped doing in-person events for 2 years (still no news on Magic: the Gathering in-person pre-releases, not authorized for Latin America despite my country being basically covid-free), - I started playing D&D (with coworkers, so the OP has a point), had one in-person session and then we moved to Roll20 (slowly coming back to in-person). I do think people were socializing outside more before the pandemic.

baud147258 5y ago

> Because we are in the middle of a global pandemic. Really? Maybe I forgot because here in France it feels like we've kinda gone back to business as usual, as long as one can show proof of vaccination (necessary if you want to go to the restaurants, cinemas and museums).

sharken 5y ago
France, Germany and Italy have really disappointed with their heavyhanded approach against those that are not vaccinated. With that said, i think many are still a bit cautious after being bombarded with warnings of the Coronavirus for 12 months straight. To me though I'm back to normality and slowly but surely everyone else.
- felipellrocha 5y ago
  > France, Germany and Italy have really disappointed with their heavyhanded approach against those that are not vaccinated. Disappointed who? The anti-vaxxer community? Good.
  - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y ago
    Point of clarification, because you're spreading misinformation: being opposed to one specific vaccine type is NOT the same as being an "anti-vaxxer." It will behoove you to be clear on that point.
    - krageon 5y ago
      > misinformation The overlap between the two groups is so large and the justifications so similar that they may as well be the same. It is not useful for clarity, brevity or comprehension to distinguish the two.
      - jcims 5y ago
        This type of generalization is what allows people to bulldoze details and nuance in favor of bright tribal lines. It’s the same psychological shortcut that folks use when they call any social program ‘socialism’. It’s lazy and destructive.

presentation 5y ago

I know plenty of people who are staying home not because they're worried about COVID, but more because they've come to enjoy the seclusion and convenience of ordering delivery all the time.

OJFord 5y ago
As someone who 'enjoyed the convenience of delivery' long before the coronavirus pandemic, it's quite weird to realise that wasn't as normal (then) as it seemed. City bubble I suppose. Or not-having-a-car (hardly unusual for London) bubble. (I don't mean takeaway food - though it's certainly 'normal' among certain demographics.. - just groceries, Amazon, etc.)
- Svperstar 5y ago
  > Or not-having-a-car (hardly unusual for London) bubble. In large sections of the US, I am guessing like 90% of the country it is almost impossible to survive without a car, like you literally will end up homeless without an automobile and I am not exaggerating.
  - OJFord 5y ago
    Sure, but no section of the US large or otherwise is in London.
- presentation 5y ago
  I live in Tokyo and prefer to go out and eat, despite delivery being easy. Food tastes better when it’s fresh, not served in a plastic container, in a nice environment, and it’s not even hard to do - hundreds of options within a 10 minute walk of my apartment.
  - OJFord 5y ago
    Like I said I'm not talking about takeaway food - which I pretty much never order, agree I'd rather eat in a restaurant. I mean about getting groceries (with which I can prepare the meal) delivered. But I suppose same would stand to compare picking up a takeaway in person vs. having it delivered. (i.e. if that's what I ate, I would almost certainly have it delivered.)